Here's what caught my eye in research over the past week:
- Trinh and Munro (with ungated earlier version here) use a choice experiment to examine intentions to migrate among farmers living in the Vietnamese Mekong Delta, based on scenarios involving six attributes (drought intensity, flood frequency, income change from migration, migration networks, neighbours' choices, and crop choice restriction), and find that all attributes positive influence migration decisions, with drought intensity having the biggest impact
- Meoli, Piva, and Righi (open access) show that a diversified university curriculum increases the likelihood of Italian women graduates getting STEM occupations shortly after graduation, while it does not affect men, while doing internships during university studies and participating in study abroad programs reduce the likelihood of men graduates entering STEM occupations, but does not affect women
- Keloharju et al. (open access) find that doctoral studies causally negatively impact mental health, but perhaps less than previously feared, using data on PhD students in Sweden
Several papers published in the journal Ecological Economics responded to an earlier paper evaluated the costs and benefits of a 130kph speed limit in Germany (which I posted about last year), including:
- Sieg (with ungated earlier version here), who argues that by ignoring tax revenues from gasoline and diesel, the earlier paper overestimates the welfare gain by about 378 million Euros
- Eisenkopf et al., who attack the foundations of the earlier cost-benefit analysis, pointing to several serious shortcomings
- Gössling, Humpe, and Litman (the authors of the original study) respond to the two critiques, arguing that many of their criticisms lack merit, while others depend on viewpoint
No comments:
Post a Comment